Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T19:10:08.110Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Impact of the Boll Weevil, 1892–1932

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 September 2009

Fabian Lange ,
Alan L. Olmstead  and
Paul W. Rhode
Fabian Lange*
Affiliation:
Assistant Professor of Economics, Yale University, P.O. Box 208264, New Haven, CT 06520–8264; and Research Fellow at IZA – Institute for the Study of Labor. E-mail: fabian.lange@yale.edu.
Alan L. Olmstead*
Affiliation:
Distinguished Professor of Economics and Director of the Institute of Governmental Affairs at the University of California, Davis, One Shields Avenue, Davis, CA 95616–8617; and member of the Giannini Foundation of Agricultural Economics. E-mail: alolmstead@ucdavis.edu.
Paul W. Rhode*
Affiliation:
McClelland Professor of Economics, Eller College of Management, The University of Arizona, P.O. Box 210108, Tucson, AZ 85721–0108; and Research Associate at the National Bureau of Economic Research. E-mail: pwrhode@email.arizona.edu.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The boll weevil is America's most celebrated agricultural pest. We analyze new county-level panel data to provide sharp estimates of the time path of the insect's effects on the southern economy. We find that in anticipation of the contact, farmers increased production, attempting to squeeze out one last large crop. Upon arrival, the weevil had a large negative and lasting impact on cotton production, acreage, and especially yields. In response, rather than taking land out of agricultural production, farmers shifted to other crops. We also find striking effects on land values and population movements.

Type
ARTICLES
Information
The Journal of Economic History , Volume 69 , Issue 3 , September 2009 , pp. 685 - 718
Copyright
Copyright © The Economic History Association 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Brown, Harry Bates. Cotton: History, Species, Varieties, Morphology, Breeding, Culture, Diseases, Marketing, and Uses. 1st edition. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1927.Google Scholar
Brown, Harry Bates. Cotton: History, Species, Varieties, Morphology, Breeding, Culture, Diseases, Marketing, and Uses. 2nd edition. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1938.Google Scholar
Brown, Harry Bates, and Ware, Jacob Osborn. Cotton: History, Species, Varieties, Morphology, Breeding, Culture, Diseases, Marketing, and Uses. 3rd edition. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1958.Google Scholar
Crew, Spencer R.“The Great Migration of Afro-Americans, 19151940.” Monthly Labor Review 110, no. 3 (1988): 34–34.Google Scholar
Gains, R. C. “The Boll Weevil.” In Yearbook of Agriculture 1952, 501–04. Washington, DC: GPO, 1952.Google Scholar
Giesen, James C.“The South's Greatest Enemy: The Cotton Boll Weevil and Its Lost Revolution, 18921930.” Ph.D. diss., University of Georgia, 2004.Google Scholar
Haines, Michael R., and the Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research. Historical, Demographic, Economic, and Social Data: The United States, 17902000. [Computer file] ICPSR 2896-v2. Hamilton, NY: Colgate University/Ann Arbor, MI: ICPSR [producer], 2004, Ann Arbor, MI: ICPSR [distributor], 2005.Google Scholar
Haney, Philip B., Lewis, W. J., and Lambert, W. R.. Cotton Production and the Boll Weevil in Georgia: History, Cost of Control, and Benefits of Eradication. Georgia Agricultural Experiment Stations Research Bulletin No. 428, 1996.Google Scholar
Helms, Douglas. “Just Looking for a Home: The Cotton Boll Weevil and the South.” Ph.D., diss., Florida State University, 1977.Google Scholar
Helms, Douglas. “Technological Methods for Boll Weevil Control.” Agricultural History 53, no. 1 (1979): 286–286.Google Scholar
Helms, Douglas. “Revision and Revolution: Changing Cultural Control Practices for the Cotton Boll Weevil.” Agricultural History 54, no. 1 (1980): 108–108.Google Scholar
Higgs, Robert. “The Boll Weevil, the Cotton Economy, and Black Migration: 19101930.” Agricultural History 50, no. 2 (1976): 335–335.Google Scholar
Hunter, W. D.Methods of Controlling the Boll Weevil. USDA Farmers' Bulletin No. 163. Washington, DC: GPO, 1903.Google Scholar
Hunter, W. D., and Coad, B. R.. The Boll-Weevil Problem. USDA Farmers' Bulletin No. 1329. Washington, DC: GPO, 1923.Google Scholar
Hyslop, J. A.Losses Occasioned by Insects, Mites, and Ticks in the United States. Washington, DC: U.S. Bureau of Entomology and Plant Quarantine, Division of Insect Pest Survey and Information, 1938.Google Scholar
Manners, Ian R.“The Persistent Problem of the Boll Weevil: Pest Control in Principle and in Practice.” Geographical Review 69, no. 1 (1979): 25–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Merchant, Carolyn. Columbia Guide to American Environmental History. New York: Columbia University Press, 2002.Google Scholar
Olmstead, Alan L., and Rhode, Paul W.. “Hog-Round Marketing, Seed Quality, and Government Policy: Institutional Change in U.S. Cotton Production, 19201960.” This Journal 63, no. 2 (2003): 447–447.Google Scholar
Olmstead, Alan L., and Rhode, Paul W.. Creating Abundance: Biological Innovation and American Agricultural Development. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2008.Google Scholar
Oosterhuis, Derrick M., and Jernstedt, Judy. “Morphology and Anatomy of the Cotton Plant.” In Cotton: Origin, History, Technology, and Production, edited by Smith, C. Wayne and Cothren, J. Tom, 175–206. New York: J. Wiley, 1999.Google Scholar
Osband, Kent. “The Boll Weevil versus King Cotton'.” This Journal 45, no. 3 (1985): 627–627.Google Scholar
Pressley, Thomas J., and Scofield, William H.. Farm Real Estate Values in the United States, 18501959 [Computer file]. ICPSR 0009. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [producer and distributor], 2001.Google Scholar
Ransom, Roger, and Sutch, Richard. One Kind of Freedom: The Economic Consequences of Emancipation. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1977.Google Scholar
Roosevelt, Theodore. State of the Union Address: Theodore Roosevelt to the Senate and House of Representatives, December 6, 1904 [Online document]. Boston, MA: Information Please, Pearson Education, 2007. Available from http://www.infoplease.com/t/hist/state-of-the-union/116.html.Google Scholar
Smith, C. Wayne, and Cothren, J. Tom, eds. Cotton: Origin, History, Technology, and Production. New York: J. Wiley, 1999.Google Scholar
Street, James H.The New Revolution in the Cotton Economy: Mechanization and Its Consequence. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1957.Google Scholar
U.S. Bureau of Agricultural Economics. Grade, Staple Length, and Tenderability of Cotton in the United States, 19281929 to 19331934. Statistical Bulletin No. 15. Washington, DC: GPO, 1936.Google Scholar
U.S. Bureau of Agricultural Economics. Statistics on Cotton and Related Data. Statistical Bulletin No. 99. Washington, DC: GPO, 1951.Google Scholar
U.S. Bureau of the Census. Quantity of Cotton Ginned in the United States. Washington, DC: GPO, 1900-1904.Google Scholar
U.S. Bureau of the Census. Cotton Production in the United States. Washington, DC: GPO, 1905-1940.Google Scholar
U.S. Bureau of the Census. Plantation Farming in the United States. Washington, DC: GPO, 1916.Google Scholar
U.S. Bureau of the Census. Fifteenth Census of the United States: 1930, Agriculture. Vol. 3, Pt. 2, The Southern States, Reports by States, with Statistics for Counties and a Summary for the United States. Washington, DC: GPO, 1932.Google Scholar
U.S. Department of Agriculture. Yearbook of Agriculture, 1921. Washington, DC: GPO, 1922.Google Scholar
U.S. Department of Agriculture. Yearbook of Agriculture, 1934. Washington, DC: GPO, 1934.Google Scholar
U.S. House of Representatives. Hearings of the House Committee on Agriculture. 58th Cong. 2nd Sess. Washington, DC: GPO, 1904.Google Scholar
Ware, Jacob Osborn. “Origin, Rise, and Development of American Upland Cotton Varieties and Their Status at Present.” University of Arkansas College of Agriculture, Agricultural Experiment Station. Mimeo, 1950.Google Scholar
Wright, Gavin. Old South, New South: Revolutions in the Southern Economy Since the Civil War. New York: Basic Books, 1986.Google Scholar
Wright, Gavin. “Reflections on One Kind of Freedom and the Southern Economy.” Explorations in Economic History 38, no. 1 (2001): 40–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar